What are your feelings about the third umpire in cricket and the TMO in rugby union? And Hawkeye in tennis?
With cricket and tennis there are natural intervals between deliveries/serves, so reviews don't necessarily stop the flow. Plus, reviews are on request and limited, rather than being applied as a matter of course. As for rugby, no one quite knows what's happened anyway, so it probably works ok there. The thing is, football is different. It's the beautiful game, and VAR detracts from its beauty.
I saw some upgrade of film of that which would have disallowed the goal, but perhaps not English tech! But with technology now most of these line decisions could be shown on big screens and judged on in seconds.
It's a game that shouldn't be lost on incorrect decisions. Too much money involved nowadays to let that happen.
I think I agree. Football is different. But at root the issue is money, exaggerated importance of results, and all pervasive TV.
Var is great Nothing beats celebrating five minutes after the goal With the few others that can be bothered celebrating I have seen var take up to five minutes to get a decision I have also seen it get two penalty decisions completely wrong in one game in Wellington It surely can be made quicker It should be used in fouls where diving is suspected Instant red will sort out that ****
They aren’t watching England or football They are mainly a very stupid cultural club of idiots Look at them ffs it’s 2019 They still think they are ****ing crusaders Seriously what are they about ?
Blame game again and again The Anglo Saxon cannot seem to understand Dutch won a game by playing much better Credit to them it’s that simple
The Dutch won by being less **** than england Had the Dutch been great they would have won in the first half
Of interest to me is the fact that the football governing bodies have over recent years attempted a number of things to try to make games less negative and have matches decided without penalty shootouts. For example, the pass-back rule to goalkeepers and the extra-time ‘golden goal’ (which didn’t last long as an initiative). There was talk a while back about tweaking the offside rule to favour the attacking side, which included the concept of ‘interfering with play’ (itself sometimes a subjective judgement). I personally commend the authorities for looking at such things, as the cynicism in matches has increased in proportion with the cash prizes and glory. Of course we all want to see referees get key decisions right. VAR is still in its infancy and will doubtless get better, but it is unarguable at this stage to say that it is not wholly reliable. I agree with Stroller about the romance of the beautiful game. When decisions are delayed for 5 minutes or more whilst unseen arbiters argue scientific fractions something is not quite right. We tend to see the same video footage as these arbiters and sit there biting our nails as to their judgement. So, many decisions still appears controversial and not as clear cut as one would hope VAR to reveal. I’m not sure what the correct answer is. I support the trialling of VAR technology, but it has to get better than what we have right now for it to be a success. Certainly, it has to be faster and, where we’re looking at microns of ‘offsidedness’ (say a foot, rather than a torso) then I believe the benefit of the doubt should go to the attacker. In its current form VAR can only benefit the defending side as it is only used to rule out, ie the ball is in the net already. Kiwi is right that this technology should also be looking at other transgressions in the game too.
the biggest wind-up for me is this continuous passing back to the keeper, who hoofs it aimlessly anyway. The whole game our defenders opted for this option, not very well either. As someone else said, beaten by not one of the best Dutch sides you'll see. We are what we are, average
I think the problem of the destruction of the spontaneity of the game that Stroller raises will be even more valid if VAR is used to look at "other transgressions" because while line technology could at least be done quickly, I doubt decisions on hand ball, diving, shirt pulling etc are so easy or quick to make.They would need to be able to view camera images from every different angle to get it right, which would surely take a lot more time to get right. There have been many occasions where TV cameras fail to pick up what happened correctly because they have not had the right camera angle.
I’d like to see some rule changes rather than relying on technology. Offside needs to be simpler, ‘level’ is very hard to judge, perhaps ‘fully beyond’ the last defender would be easier. Offside but not interfering with play? Bin it inside the area, If you are offside there you are offside. Diving, time wasting, shirt pulling in the area - straight red, that will change player behaviour. Etc etc. The beauty of the game is it’s simplicity, and that is why it’s so popular, any idiot can understand it. Having said that I’d welcome VAR for all of whichever team Neil Warnock is managing games, it least it will stop to old git whining about how unfair his life is.
Good point however no sure I see many fans when I watch football abroad and I watch a lot live now act in the manner the English fans abroad act I would stand that there is a difference and sub culture with English football fans abroad ... not all of course but there is a collective People can defend this of course but in my experience I cannot
Stones, Maguire, Chilwell and Walker not being good enough aside, the main problem for the keeper and back four was that they had so few options to pass the ball into midfield. Winks, whilst no world beaters, is probably our best option in that holding roll but he was injured when the squad was named. Occasionally we did manage to play into players, but often it was the likes of Sterling dropping deep. Players like Rice are not able to receive the ball on the half turn in the way Winks and the Dutch midfield are able to do. Barclay and Delph are also not great in that regard. The problem isn't playing out (look at the wonderful move that led to what we thought was Lindgard scoring the winner, started by Stones in our 6 yard box?). The problem is Stones consistently making the wrong choices and Walker, Maguie and Chilwell not being good enough, but could probably cope if we had a more accessible midfield. Henderson improved things when he came on. Also, over the last year or so Kane has dropped quite deep to link play too. He didn't start and wasn't fully fit. I like the way Southgate is making us play, but he needs to root out the players who aren't up to playing the way he wants. Add Alexander-Arnold, Gomez and Rose to last night's back four and we would have been greatly improved imo.
